Services

Yorkshire Forward land bought for £1.15m

COUNCIL chiefs in York have had to spend £1.15 million buying a patch of land once owned by axed quango Yorkshire Forward from the Government, it has been revealed.

City of York Council has confirmed that the purchase of the site at Holgate Park, near the railway station and the CPP headquarters, was completed last July as it will be essential to the huge York Central project.

Local authorities across Yorkshire said this week that they been forced to spend more than £12 million of public money to buy back key development sites across the county, after they were transferred to the Homes and Communities Agency following the abolition of regional development agency Yorkshire Forward.

The Holgate Park land is among them.

York’s council leader James Alexander said: “The purchase of this land was agreed as a strategically important and major piece of land in the York Central development.

“Unfortunately, the Government forced us into purchasing the land rather than transferring it at no cost, which would have avoided the taxpayer paying twice for it.”

Coun Alexander said all parties on the council had supported the purchase.

The Press reported on Saturday that the council had submitted a bid to the Government’s critical infrastructure investment fund, which could fasttrack work on key sites such as York Central, the A19 at Germany Beck in Fulford and the Nestlé Cocoa Works.

Comments

£1.5 million or £2.5 million?
Whichever price it seems huge for this small patch of land but why not its only borrowed money!

£1.5 million or £2.5 million?
Whichever price it seems huge for this small patch of land but why not its only borrowed money!meme

£1.5 million or £2.5 million?
Whichever price it seems huge for this small patch of land but why not its only borrowed money!

Score: 0

jumpersforgoalposts
10:37am Tue 15 Jan 13

“Unfortunately, the Government forced us into purchasing the land rather than transferring it at no cost, which would have avoided the taxpayer paying twice for it.” has anyone told alexander that the taxpayer (yorkshire forward) must have also sold the land once as well, and could/should do again in the future!

“Unfortunately, the Government forced us into purchasing the land rather than transferring it at no cost, which would have avoided the taxpayer paying twice for it.” has anyone told alexander that the taxpayer (yorkshire forward) must have also sold the land once as well, and could/should do again in the future!jumpersforgoalposts

“Unfortunately, the Government forced us into purchasing the land rather than transferring it at no cost, which would have avoided the taxpayer paying twice for it.” has anyone told alexander that the taxpayer (yorkshire forward) must have also sold the land once as well, and could/should do again in the future!

Score: 0

capt spaulding
10:39am Tue 15 Jan 13

I hear the heavy patter of the feet of the recievers coming.
Not far to travel after H M V.

I hear the heavy patter of the feet of the recievers coming.
Not far to travel after H M V.capt spaulding

I hear the heavy patter of the feet of the recievers coming.
Not far to travel after H M V.

Score: 0

bob the builder
12:14pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Nobody made them buy it, they did it for some grandiose scheme that some councillor thinks will be named after him and leave his name in history, but will never happen. Their names will be in the city history, but for the wrong reasons. Another loony lefty council decision better suited to a London Borough. All we have as a legacy is a bigger patch of wasteground for the flytippers of the future when we are charged for bin emptying as the money has run out for services as it was squandered on vanity schemes.

Nobody made them buy it, they did it for some grandiose scheme that some councillor thinks will be named after him and leave his name in history, but will never happen. Their names will be in the city history, but for the wrong reasons. Another loony lefty council decision better suited to a London Borough. All we have as a legacy is a bigger patch of wasteground for the flytippers of the future when we are charged for bin emptying as the money has run out for services as it was squandered on vanity schemes.bob the builder

Nobody made them buy it, they did it for some grandiose scheme that some councillor thinks will be named after him and leave his name in history, but will never happen. Their names will be in the city history, but for the wrong reasons. Another loony lefty council decision better suited to a London Borough. All we have as a legacy is a bigger patch of wasteground for the flytippers of the future when we are charged for bin emptying as the money has run out for services as it was squandered on vanity schemes.

Score: 0

beechgrover
1:12pm Tue 15 Jan 13

At the end of the day, this is a transfer of public funds from the local authorities to central government. The upside is that the city can sell the land and recoup the cost, always assuming that they paid a fair price in today's market. (Shurely that goes without saying ;-)

At the end of the day, this is a transfer of public funds from the local authorities to central government. The upside is that the city can sell the land and recoup the cost, always assuming that they paid a fair price in today's market. (Shurely that goes without saying ;-)beechgrover

At the end of the day, this is a transfer of public funds from the local authorities to central government. The upside is that the city can sell the land and recoup the cost, always assuming that they paid a fair price in today's market. (Shurely that goes without saying ;-)

Score: 0

Scarlet Pimpernel
1:56pm Tue 15 Jan 13

meme wrote…

£1.5 million or £2.5 million? Whichever price it seems huge for this small patch of land but why not its only borrowed money!

It says £1.15m !!!!

Where do you get your figures from ?

[quote][p][bold]meme[/bold] wrote:
£1.5 million or £2.5 million? Whichever price it seems huge for this small patch of land but why not its only borrowed money![/p][/quote]It says £1.15m !!!!
Where do you get your figures from ?Scarlet Pimpernel

meme wrote…

£1.5 million or £2.5 million? Whichever price it seems huge for this small patch of land but why not its only borrowed money!

It says £1.15m !!!!

Where do you get your figures from ?

Score: 0

Scarlet Pimpernel
2:10pm Tue 15 Jan 13

If Yorkshire Forward's purchase of the land was funded by Central Government and therefore paid for by all UK tax-payers, then it's only fair that COYC pay the government, using money from York taxpayers, as the land is now for York's benefit. Coun Alexander is using this as an opportunity to attack the coalition, infering that it's a discriminatory attack on York. It's not, and Alexander just looks petty and foolish.

If Yorkshire Forward's purchase of the land was funded by Central Government and therefore paid for by all UK tax-payers, then it's only fair that COYC pay the government, using money from York taxpayers, as the land is now for York's benefit. Coun Alexander is using this as an opportunity to attack the coalition, infering that it's a discriminatory attack on York. It's not, and Alexander just looks petty and foolish.Scarlet Pimpernel

If Yorkshire Forward's purchase of the land was funded by Central Government and therefore paid for by all UK tax-payers, then it's only fair that COYC pay the government, using money from York taxpayers, as the land is now for York's benefit. Coun Alexander is using this as an opportunity to attack the coalition, infering that it's a discriminatory attack on York. It's not, and Alexander just looks petty and foolish.

Score: 0

Scarlet Pimpernel
2:14pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Lets hope the council recoups the proceeds plus interest when it sells the ransom strip on. Not like when they agreed to sell the Hungate land at a loss to Hiscox, a firm that paid £1m tax on their last six months £125m profit !!!!

Lets hope the council recoups the proceeds plus interest when it sells the ransom strip on. Not like when they agreed to sell the Hungate land at a loss to Hiscox, a firm that paid £1m tax on their last six months £125m profit !!!!Scarlet Pimpernel

Lets hope the council recoups the proceeds plus interest when it sells the ransom strip on. Not like when they agreed to sell the Hungate land at a loss to Hiscox, a firm that paid £1m tax on their last six months £125m profit !!!!

Score: 0

pedalling paul
4:13pm Tue 15 Jan 13

National planning guidance encourages Local Authorities to develop urban brownfield sites as a first choice, as these are accessible by all travel choices hence are not car dependant.
Prospective developers of eg greenfield sites must satisfy planners that available brownfield is not suitable for their needs.

National planning guidance encourages Local Authorities to develop urban brownfield sites as a first choice, as these are accessible by all travel choices hence are not car dependant.
Prospective developers of eg greenfield sites must satisfy planners that available brownfield is not suitable for their needs.pedalling paul

National planning guidance encourages Local Authorities to develop urban brownfield sites as a first choice, as these are accessible by all travel choices hence are not car dependant.
Prospective developers of eg greenfield sites must satisfy planners that available brownfield is not suitable for their needs.

Score: 0

capt spaulding
5:50pm Tue 15 Jan 13

pedalling paul wrote…

National planning guidance encourages Local Authorities to develop urban brownfield sites as a first choice, as these are accessible by all travel choices hence are not car dependant.
Prospective developers of eg greenfield sites must satisfy planners that available brownfield is not suitable for their needs.

If you are going to dig up green field and brownfield sites you will need your spear and jackson no 4 shovel.

[quote][p][bold]pedalling paul [/bold] wrote:
National planning guidance encourages Local Authorities to develop urban brownfield sites as a first choice, as these are accessible by all travel choices hence are not car dependant.
Prospective developers of eg greenfield sites must satisfy planners that available brownfield is not suitable for their needs.[/p][/quote]If you are going to dig up green field and brownfield sites you will need your spear and jackson no 4 shovel.capt spaulding

pedalling paul wrote…

National planning guidance encourages Local Authorities to develop urban brownfield sites as a first choice, as these are accessible by all travel choices hence are not car dependant.
Prospective developers of eg greenfield sites must satisfy planners that available brownfield is not suitable for their needs.

If you are going to dig up green field and brownfield sites you will need your spear and jackson no 4 shovel.

Score: 0

Eric Olthwaite
3:17pm Wed 16 Jan 13

‘capt spaulding says... 5:50pm Tue 15 Jan 13
If you are going to dig up green field and brownfield sites you will need your spear and jackson no 4 shovel.’

Enid will tell you all about my collection of shovel handles and particularly my No.4 shovel handle.

Although she seems to have disappeared to feed her father’s racing vultures.

Meddling Paul has no idea has he?

‘COUNCIL chiefs in York have had to spend £1.15 million buying a patch of land once owned by axed quango Yorkshire Forward from the Government’

No they did not!

They did it because they are experts at deliberate financial mismanagement with council taxpayer money!

Gerrymandering again!

I would rather use the term ‘defrauded the council tax payer’.

‘capt spaulding says... 5:50pm Tue 15 Jan 13
If you are going to dig up green field and brownfield sites you will need your spear and jackson no 4 shovel.’
Enid will tell you all about my collection of shovel handles and particularly my No.4 shovel handle.
Although she seems to have disappeared to feed her father’s racing vultures.
Meddling Paul has no idea has he?
‘COUNCIL chiefs in York have had to spend £1.15 million buying a patch of land once owned by axed quango Yorkshire Forward from the Government’
No they did not!
They did it because they are experts at deliberate financial mismanagement with council taxpayer money!
Gerrymandering again!
I would rather use the term ‘defrauded the council tax payer’.Eric Olthwaite

‘capt spaulding says... 5:50pm Tue 15 Jan 13
If you are going to dig up green field and brownfield sites you will need your spear and jackson no 4 shovel.’

Enid will tell you all about my collection of shovel handles and particularly my No.4 shovel handle.

Although she seems to have disappeared to feed her father’s racing vultures.

Meddling Paul has no idea has he?

‘COUNCIL chiefs in York have had to spend £1.15 million buying a patch of land once owned by axed quango Yorkshire Forward from the Government’

No they did not!

They did it because they are experts at deliberate financial mismanagement with council taxpayer money!

Ipsoregulated

This website and associated newspapers adhere to the Independent Press Standards Organisation's Editors' Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about the editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then please contact the editor here. If you are dissatisfied with the response provided you can contact IPSO here